Webpage Accessibility Compliance

ABSTRACT

Aspects described herein may provide determination of compliance with accessibility rules by a webpage. A first version of a webpage may be compliant with the accessibility rules. The first version of the webpage may be modified to create the second version of the webpage. The second version of the webpage may be displayed. A voiceover of the second version of the webpage may be initiated. The voiceover may include starting automatic text-to-speech software that reads aloud the second version of the webpage. The voiceover of the second version of the webpage may be recorded and stored. A textual transcript of the stored recording may be generated. Compliance of the second version of the webpage with the accessibility rules may be determined based on the textual transcript of the stored recording and based on the first version of the webpage.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of and claims priority to U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 17/080,951, filed Oct. 27, 2020, which is acontinuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/711,683, filed Dec.12, 2019 (now U.S. Pat. No. 10,839,039), each of which is herebyincorporated by reference in its entirety.

FIELD OF USE

Aspects of the disclosure relate generally to presentation of webpagecontent. More specifically, aspects of the disclosure provide techniquesfor ensuring that content presented by a webpage is accessible to allusers.

BACKGROUND

Websites and associated webpages present a wide variety of content tousers. The content may include, for example, any type of textual,graphical, image, or video content. The content may also include datafields for a user to input data, either by entering data directly orselecting an input from predetermined choices (e.g., using a drop-downmenu).

Owners and/or operators of websites want their websites to be usable bya wide audience. Accordingly, many websites are designed to beaccessible to disabled individuals. To confirm accessibility, webpagesare often evaluated against various accessibility rules so that adetermination as to the accessibility of a webpage may be determined.Webpages that are not complaint in view of the accessibility rules maybe modified to be compliant. Once compliant, the webpage may be launchedand made accessible to the public.

Websites undergo frequent changes. As a result, a formerly compliantwebpage may require re-evaluation to determine if a modified version ofthe webpage meets accessibility rules. Conventional techniques forevaluating webpage accessibility compliance are often inefficient andinaccurate. For example, many conventional techniques for evaluatingwebpage accessibility compliance are limited to just reviewingunderlying code (e.g., HTML) for generating the modified webpage. Themodified code may be reviewed to detect any portion of the code that maygenerate presentation of content that does not meet the accessibilityrules. Evaluating compliance in this manner may not detect certainaccessibility issues as it is not based on the actual experience ofusing the modified webpage from the perspective of a disabledindividual.

Aspects described herein may address these and other problems, andgenerally improve the reliability and accuracy of determining complianceof a modified webpage with accessibility rules.

SUMMARY

The following presents a simplified summary of various aspects describedherein. This summary is not an extensive overview, and is not intendedto identify key or critical elements or to delineate the scope of theclaims. The following summary merely presents some concepts in asimplified form as an introductory prelude to the more detaileddescription provided below.

Aspects described herein may provide evaluation of a webpage forcompliance with accessibility rules. According to some aspects, theseand other benefits may be achieved by evaluating a current version of awebpage in view of a prior version of the webpage known to be complaintwith the accessibility rules.

More particularly, some aspects described herein may provide acomputer-implemented method for determining a compliance of a secondversion of a webpage with the one or more accessibility rules. Themethod may include displaying a first version of a webpage. The firstversion of the webpage may be compliant with the one or moreaccessibility rules. The first version of the webpage may be modified tocreate the second version of the webpage. The second version of thewebpage may be displayed. A voiceover of the second version of thewebpage may be initiated. The voiceover may include starting automatictext-to-speech software that reads aloud the second version of thewebpage. The voiceover of the second version of the webpage may berecorded and stored. A textual transcript of the stored recording of thevoiceover of the second version of the webpage may be generated.Compliance of the second version of the webpage with the one or moreaccessibility rules may then be determined based on the textualtranscript of the stored recording of the voiceover of the secondversion of the webpage and based on the first version of the webpage. Auser interface may indicate compliant and/or non-complaint portions ofthe textual transcript based on a comparison to a textual representationof the first version of the webpage and/or based on a comparison to theone or more accessibility rules directly.

Corresponding apparatus, systems, and computer-readable media are alsowithin the scope of the disclosure.

These features, along with many others, are discussed in greater detailbelow.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present disclosure is illustrated by way of example and not limitedin the accompanying figures in which like reference numerals indicatesimilar elements and in which:

FIG. 1 depicts an example of a computing device that may be used inimplementing one or more aspects of the disclosure in accordance withone or more illustrative aspects discussed herein;

FIG. 2 depicts a first version of a webpage that is complaint withaccessibility rules according to one or more aspects of the disclosure;

FIG. 3 depicts a second version of the webpage to be evaluated forcompliance with the accessibility rules according to one or more aspectsof the disclosure;

FIG. 4 depicts a flowchart for a first method for determining complianceof a modified version of a webpage with accessibility rules according toone or more aspects of the disclosure; and

FIG. 5 depicts a flowchart for a second method for determiningcompliance of a modified version of a webpage with accessibility rulesaccording to one or more aspects of the disclosure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the following description of the various embodiments, reference ismade to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, and inwhich is shown by way of illustration various embodiments in whichaspects of the disclosure may be practiced. It is to be understood thatother embodiments may be utilized and structural and functionalmodifications may be made without departing from the scope of thepresent disclosure. Aspects of the disclosure are capable of otherembodiments and of being practiced or being carried out in various ways.Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology and terminology usedherein are for the purpose of description and should not be regarded aslimiting. Rather, the phrases and terms used herein are to be giventheir broadest interpretation and meaning. The use of “including” and“comprising” and variations thereof is meant to encompass the itemslisted thereafter and equivalents thereof as well as additional itemsand equivalents thereof.

By way of introduction, aspects discussed herein may relate to methodsand techniques for determining compliance of a webpage withaccessibility rules. The webpage may be considered to be a currentversion of a webpage. The current version of the webpage may be amodified version of a prior version of the webpage. The prior version ofthe webpage may be complaint with the accessibility rules. Datacorresponding to the current version of the webpage may be received. Thecurrent version of the webpage may be displayed based on the receiveddata. A voiceover of the displayed current version of the webpage may beinitiated and recorded. The recording may include starting a softwareprogram that automatically converts text to speech to audibly read aloudthe current version of the webpage and to also record the announcedspeech. The recording of the voiceover of the displayed current versionof the webpage may be stored. The stored recording of the voiceover ofthe displayed current version of the webpage may be converted to textualdata. Compliance of the current version of the webpage with theaccessibility rules may then be determined based on the textual data.

Before discussing these concepts in greater detail, however, severalexamples of a computing device that may be used in implementing and/orotherwise providing various aspects of the disclosure will first bediscussed with respect to FIG. 1 .

FIG. 1 illustrates one example of a computing device 101 that may beused to implement one or more illustrative aspects discussed herein. Forexample, computing device 101 may, in some embodiments, implement one ormore aspects of the disclosure by reading and/or executing instructionsand performing one or more actions based on the instructions. In someembodiments, computing device 101 may represent, be incorporated in,and/or include various devices such as a desktop computer, a computerserver, a mobile device (e.g., a laptop computer, a tablet computer, asmart phone, any other types of mobile computing devices, and the like),and/or any other type of data processing device.

Computing device 101 may, in some embodiments, operate in a standaloneenvironment. In others, computing device 101 may operate in a networkedenvironment. As shown in FIG. 1 , various network nodes 101, 105, 107,and 109 may be interconnected via a network 103, such as the Internet.Other networks may also or alternatively be used, including privateintranets, corporate networks, local area networks (LANs), wirelessnetworks, personal networks (PAN), and the like. Network 103 is forillustration purposes and may be replaced with fewer or additionalcomputer networks. A LAN may have one or more of any known LANtopologies and may use one or more of a variety of different protocols,such as Ethernet. Devices 101, 105, 107, 109 and other devices (notshown) may be connected to one or more of the networks via twisted pairwires, coaxial cable, fiber optics, radio waves, or other communicationmedia.

As seen in FIG. 1 , computing device 101 may include a processor 111,RAM 113, ROM 115, network interface 117, input/output interfaces 119(e.g., keyboard, mouse, display, printer, etc.), and memory 121.Processor 111 may include one or more computer processing units (CPUs),graphical processing units (GPUs), and/or other processing units such asa processor adapted to perform computations associated with machinelearning. I/O 119 may include a variety of interface units and drivesfor reading, writing, displaying, and/or printing data or files. I/O 119may be coupled with a display such as display 120. Memory 121 may storesoftware for configuring computing device 101 into a special purposecomputing device in order to perform one or more of the variousfunctions discussed herein. Memory 121 may store operating systemsoftware 123 for controlling overall operation of computing device 101,control logic 125 for instructing computing device 101 to performaspects discussed herein, software 127, data 129, and other applications131. Control logic 125 may be incorporated in and may be a part ofsoftware 127. In other embodiments, computing device 101 may include twoor more of any and/or all of these components (e.g., two or moreprocessors, two or more memories, etc.) and/or other components and/orsubsystems not illustrated here.

Devices 105, 107, 109 may have similar or different architecture asdescribed with respect to computing device 101. Those of skill in theart will appreciate that the functionality of computing device 101 (ordevice 105, 107, 109) as described herein may be spread across multipledata processing devices, for example, to distribute processing loadacross multiple computers, to segregate transactions based on geographiclocation, user access level, quality of service (QoS), etc. For example,devices 101, 105, 107, 109, and others may operate in concert to provideparallel computing features in support of the operation of control logic125 and/or software 127.

One or more aspects discussed herein may be embodied in computer-usableor readable data and/or computer-executable instructions, such as in oneor more program modules, executed by one or more computers or otherdevices as described herein. Generally, program modules includeroutines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. thatperform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data typeswhen executed by a processor in a computer or other device. The modulesmay be written in a source code programming language that issubsequently compiled for execution, or may be written in a scriptinglanguage such as (but not limited to) HTML or XML. The computerexecutable instructions may be stored on a computer readable medium suchas a hard disk, optical disk, removable storage media, solid statememory, RAM, etc. As will be appreciated by one of skill in the art, thefunctionality of the program modules may be combined or distributed asdesired in various embodiments. In addition, the functionality may beembodied in whole or in part in firmware or hardware equivalents such asintegrated circuits, field programmable gate arrays (FPGA), and thelike. Particular data structures may be used to more effectivelyimplement one or more aspects discussed herein, and such data structuresare contemplated within the scope of computer executable instructionsand computer-usable data described herein. Various aspects discussedherein may be embodied as a method, a computing device, a dataprocessing system, or a computer program product.

Having discussed several examples of computing devices which may be usedto implement some aspects as discussed further below, discussion willnow turn to an example modification to a webpage that may triggerre-evaluation of compliance with accessibility rules.

FIG. 2 illustrates a first or initial version of a webpage 202. Thefirst version of the webpage 202 may include a variety of content. Thecontent may be any type of content including visual and/or readablecontent, video content, textual content, and/or graphical content. As anexample, the first version of the webpage 202 may include textualcontent 204, graphical content 206, textual content 208, data inputfield 210, and textual content 212.

The textual content 204 may provide a description of the first versionof the webpage 202 and the content provided thereby. The graphicalcontent 206 may be an image or picture. The textual content 208 may be alabel or description of the graphical content 206. The input data field210 may be any input field that may be used to input data by a user ofthe first version of the webpage 202. The input data field 210 may allowa user to enter data directly (e.g., through a keyboard) or may allowthe user to select data based on a set of predetermined choices (e.g.,through a drop-down menu). The textual content 212 may be an instructionor indicator specifying a type of data to be entered into the input datafield 210. The first version of the webpage 202 is not limited to theexample content 204-212 as the first version of the webpage 202 mayinclude any type of content for presentation and use by a user.

The first version of the webpage 202 may be generated based on code(e.g. HTML, XML, Javascript, PHP, etc.). For purposes of explanationonly, and without intent to limit, HTML is described as being used togenerate webpages. The HTML code may specify the type, arrangement,and/or operation of the content of the webpage 202. The first version ofthe webpage 202 may be complaint with accessibility rules. The firstversion of webpage 202 may be compliant with the accessibility rulesbased on the HTML code used to generate the first version of the webpage202. The accessibility rules may include one or more rules or tests fordetermining whether a webpage is accessible and/or usable by a disabledindividual including, for example, individuals with physicaldisabilities such as visually impaired or blind individuals.

The accessibility rules may enable determination as to whether a webpagemay be navigated (e.g., by using only keyboard inputs) by a disabledindividual. The accessibility rules may enable determination as towhether a webpage conveys all of the included content or information ofa webpage to a disabled individual. Some examples of determining whethera webpage conveys all content or information may include: whether awebpage may be read aloud by screen reader software; whether a user maybe guided to and access a data input field of the webpage and be guidedas to the type of information requested for input; whether tags or otherdescriptions (either included in the HTML code, embedded, or displayedon the webpage) are included for graphical or other visual content; andwhether a transcript of video or audio content is provided.

In general, the accessibility rules may include one or more rules (e.g.,tests) for determining a level of usability of a webpage by individualswith disabilities. The accessibility rules may assess the level ofusability based on a variety of metrics such as those described herein.If a number of accessibility rules that are not met exceed a threshold,then the webpage may be determined to have a poor level of usability andmay be deemed inaccessible (i.e., determined as not meetingaccessibility compliance requirements). If a number of accessibilityrules that are not met is below the threshold, then the webpage may bedetermined to have a good level of usability and may be deemedaccessible (i.e., determined as meeting accessibility compliancerequirements). In various embodiments, the threshold can be set to bezero (“0”) such that any failure to meet one of the accessibility rulesresults in the determination that the webpage is not complaint with theaccessibility rules.

In various embodiments, the accessibility rules may be self-imposedrules. For example, the accessibility rules may be developed by awebsite owner, operator, or developer. In various embodiments, theaccessibility rules may be issued by a legal authority. As an example,the accessibility rules may be based on accessibility considerationsspecified within laws, rules, case law, or regulations associated withthe American with Disabilities Act (ADA). Again, as described herein,the accessibility rules provide a manner for confirming theaccessibility and/or usability of a website and/or webpage by a disabledindividual and may specify techniques for providing content through awebpage to ensure accessibility. For purposes of explanation herein, thefirst version of the webpage 202 may be considered as being compliantwith one or more accessibility rules.

FIG. 3 illustrates a second or subsequent version of a webpage 302. Thesecond version of the webpage 302 may also include a variety of content.The second version of the webpage 302 may represent a modified versionof the first version of the webpage 202. The second version of thewebpage 302 may include content from the first version of the webpage202 and may also include new or different content. In variousembodiments, the second version of the webpage 302 may be generated bymodification of the HTML code used to generate the first version of thewebpage 202.

As shown in FIG. 3 , the second version of the webpage 302 may includethe textual content 204, the data input field 210, and the textualcontent 212, each of which may have been provided by the first versionof the webpage 202. The second version of the webpage 302 mayadditionally include the following new content (in comparison to thefirst version of the webpage 202): video content 304, textual content306, data input field 308, and data input field 310. With themodifications of the first version of the webpage 202 to generate thesecond version of the webpage 302, the second version of the webpage 302provides a new presentation of content.

It is desirable to ensure that the second version of the webpage 302 iscompliant with the accessibility rules—for example, to ensure thatpresentation of any new content and/or all content meets anypresentation and/or usability requirements imposed by the accessibilityrules. Conventional techniques for evaluating compliance of a modifiedversion of webpage that was initially compliant are ineffective andinefficient. Such conventional techniques often only rely on inspectionof the HTML code for the modified webpage. That is, often only themodified portions of the HTML code in comparison to the original versionof the HTML code corresponding to the initially complaint webpage arecompared. By only focusing on changes to the underlying HTML code, theseconventional techniques may not accurately reflect the actual userexperience in using the modified webpage. In turn, modified versions ofinitially compliant webpages may be deemed complaint that are actuallynot accessible or usable by a disabled individual. Modified webpagesthat are actually not compliant with accessibility rules may thereforebe made publicly available erroneously. Techniques described hereinprovide more accurate and reliable determinations of the compliance of amodified version of a webpage (e.g., the second version of the webpage302) with one or more accessibility rules.

FIG. 4 illustrates an example method 400 for determining compliance of amodified version of a webpage with accessibility rules in accordancewith one or more aspects described herein. Method 400 may be implementedbased on the first version of the webpage 202 and the second version ofthe webpage 302 depicted in FIGS. 2 and 3 , respectively. Method 400 maybe implemented by a suitable computing system, as described herein. Forexample, method 400 may be implemented in any suitable computingenvironment by a computing device and/or combination of computingdevices, such as computing devices 101, 105, 107, and 109 of FIG. 1 .Method 400 may be implemented in suitable program instructions, such asin software 127, and may operate on data, such as data 129.

At step 402, a first version of a webpage may be displayed. The versionof the webpage may be complaint with one or more accessibility rules. Invarious embodiments, the first version of the webpage may correspond tothe first version of the webpage 202 depicted in FIG. 2 . Theaccessibility rules may be self-imposed rules, rules issued by a legalauthority, rules related to ADA requirements, and/or any other type ofrules or regulations providing guidance for determining the usabilityand/or accessibility of a webpage or website by a disabled individual.

At step 404, the first version of the webpage may be modified to createa second version of the webpage. The first version of the webpage may bemodified from any type of computing device, including a mobile device.The first version of the webpage may be modified by modifying HTML codeused to generate the first version of the webpage. The second version ofthe webpage may include content from the first version of the webpageand may include new or additional content.

At step 406, the second version of the webpage may be displayed. Invarious embodiments, the second version of the webpage may correspond tothe second version of the webpage 302 depicted in FIG. 3 .

At step 408, a voiceover of the second version of the webpage may beinitiated. The voiceover may audibly announce any content or features ofthe second version of the webpage. The voiceover may operate as and/orprovide similar outputs as a screen reader program or application. Invarious embodiments, the voiceover may include automatic text-to-speechsoftware that reads aloud the second version of the webpage. In variousembodiments, the voiceover may sequentially step through all contents orfeatures of the second version of the webpage. In various embodiments,the voiceover may audibly announce each content or feature based on itsvisual presentation and/or based on any related tag, description, orrelated information specified by the underlying HTML code.

In various embodiments, initiating the voiceover of the second versionof the webpage may include generating audio data corresponding to eachdata input field within the second version of the webpage. The datainput field may correspond to any type of user input feature orcomponent for receiving user input data (e.g., a drop down menu, scrollbutton, radio button, etc.). In various embodiments, the voiceover ofthe second version of the webpage may include sequentially determiningtextual data associated with each data input field within the secondversion of the webpage. The associated textual data may be visuallydisplayed and/or may be embedded as a tag or other descriptor associatedwith a data input field.

At step 410, the voiceover of the second version of the webpage may berecorded. The recording of the voiceover of the second version of thewebpage may also be stored.

At step 412, a textual transcript of the stored recording of thevoiceover of the second version of the webpage may be generated. Thetextual transcript may be generated by software that converts arecording into text. The textual transcript may also be stored at step412.

At step 414, compliance of the second version of the webpage with theone or more accessibility rules may be determined. The compliance may bedetermined based on the textual transcript of the stored recording ofthe voiceover of the second version of the webpage and based on thefirst version of the webpage.

In various embodiments, determining the compliance of the second versionof the webpage may include comparing the textual transcript to abaseline representation of the first version of the webpage. Thebaseline representation of the first version of the webpage may be, forexample, a textual representation of a voiceover of the first version ofthe webpage.

In various embodiments, a user interface may be used to facilitatecomparison of the textual transcript of the stored recording of thevoiceover of the second version of the webpage to the baselinerepresentation of the first version of the webpage. For example, theuser interface may indicate one or more changes between the textualrepresentation of the voiceover of the first version of the webpage andthe textual transcript of the stored recording of the voiceover of thesecond version of the webpage. In various embodiments, compliance of thesecond version of the webpage may be determined by comparing the one ormore changes to the one or more accessibility rules. In doing so,changes between the first and second versions of the webpages may beefficiently identified and compared to the accessibility rules to flagany changes that may not comply with the accessibility rules.

In various embodiments, compliance of the second version of the webpagewith the one or more accessibility rules may be determined by directlycomparing the textual transcript of the stored recording of thevoiceover of the second version of the webpage to the one or moreaccessibility rules. In various embodiments, the results of thecomparison may be presented by the user interface. As an example, theuser interface may indicate portions of the textual transcript of thestored recording of the voiceover of the second version of the webpagethat are not compliant with the one or more accessibility rules.Additionally or alternatively thereto, the user interface may indicateportions of the textual transcript of the stored recording of thevoiceover of the second version of the webpage that are compliant withthe one or more accessibility rules. As a result, an efficient andreliable manner for confirming the compliance of the second version ofthe webpage may be provided.

In various embodiments, portions of the method 400 may be implementedautomatically. For example, one or more steps of the method 400 may beautomatically implemented as specified by software. In this manner, anindividual wishing to confirm the compliance of the second version ofthe website may initiate the software after displaying the secondversion of the webpage at step 406. Thereafter, one or more subsequentsteps of the method 400 may be implemented automatically by the softwareat the request or initiation of the user.

As an example, accessibility rules may require each data input field ofa webpage to include an associated description that may be read aloud bya screen reader program. The description may be visually presented onthe webpage or may only be associated to the data input field within theunderlying HTML code (e.g., as a tag associated with the data inputfield). The method 400 may be used to ensure that this accessibilityrule is met by the second version of the webpage.

For example, the newly introduced data input field 310 may not beassociated with a visual description that is displayed on the secondversion of the webpage 302. Instead, the data input field 310 may beassociated with an embedded description (e.g., a tag within the HTMLcode associated with the data input field 310). The method 400 mayconfirm that the embedded (non-visually presented) description is indeedprovided and is read aloud during the voiceover (e.g., by reviewing thetranscript of the voiceover). If not, the method 400 may enable a userto determine that a required description of the data input field 310 isnot provided, thereby necessitating modification of the underlying HTMLcode.

FIG. 5 illustrates an example method 500 for determining compliance of amodified version of a webpage with accessibility rules in accordancewith one or more aspects described herein. Method 500 may be implementedbased on the first version of the webpage 202 and the second version ofthe webpage 302 depicted in FIGS. 2 and 3 , respectively. Method 500 maybe implemented by a suitable computing system, as described herein. Forexample, method 500 may be implemented in any suitable computingenvironment by a computing device and/or combination of computingdevices, such as computing devices 101, 105, 107, and 109 of FIG. 1 .Method 500 may be implemented in suitable program instructions, such asin software 127, and may operate on data, such as data 129.

At step 502, data corresponding to a current version of a webpage may bereceived.

At step 504, the current version of the webpage may be displayed basedon the received data. The current version of the webpage may bedisplayed on any type of display device.

At step 506, a voiceover of the displayed current version of the webpagemay be recorded. In various embodiments, recording may include startinga software program that automatically converts text to speech to audiblyread the current version of the webpage. The recording of the voiceoverof the displayed current version of the webpage may then be stored. Invarious embodiments, recording the voiceover of the displayed currentversion of the webpage may include recording audible representations ofinformation associated with input data fields within the current versionof the webpage.

At 508, the stored recording of the voiceover of the displayed currentversion of the webpage may be converted to textual data.

At 510, compliance of the current version of the webpage to one or moreuser accessibility rules may be determined based on the textual data. Invarious embodiment, compliance may be determined by comparing thetextual data to baseline textual data corresponding to a prior versionof the webpage, which may be compliant with the one or more useraccessibility rules. In various embodiments, the baseline textual datamay be generated based on a recording of a voiceover of the priorversion of the webpage.

In various embodiments, a user interface may indicate (e.g., visually ona display) one or more changes between the baseline textual data and thetextual data. In various embodiment, the user interface may indicatethat the one or more changes between the baseline textual data and thetextual data are complaint with the one or more user accessibility rulesbased on comparing the one or more changes to the one or more useraccessibility rules. In various embodiments, the user interface mayindicate that the one or more changes between the baseline textual dataand the textual data are not complaint with the one or more useraccessibility rules based on comparing the one or more changes to theone or more user accessibility rules.

Some aspects described herein may provide benefits for determiningcompliance of a webpage to accessibility rules. Compliance testing maybe based on simulating use of the webpage by a disabled individual. Indoing so, the compliance testing may be more accurate and reliably,thereby reducing the risk of releasing a webpage to the public that isnot accessible to one or more disabled individuals.

Although the subject matter has been described in language specific tostructural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understoodthat the subject matter defined in the appended claims is notnecessarily limited to the specific features or acts described above.Rather, the specific features and acts described above are disclosed asexample forms of implementing the claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method comprising: modifying a first version ofa webpage to create a second version of the webpage, wherein the firstversion of the webpage is compliant with one or more accessibility rulesthat indicate a level of usability of the webpage by a visually impairedindividual; displaying the second version of the webpage; recording avoiceover of an entirety of the displayed second version of the webpage;generating a transcript of the recording of the voiceover of theentirety of the displayed second version of the webpage; comparing thetranscript of the recording of the voiceover of the entirety of thedisplayed second version of the webpage to a textual representation of avoiceover of the first version of the webpage; determining, based on thecomparing the transcript of the recording of the voiceover of theentirety of the displayed second version of the webpage to the textualrepresentation of the voiceover of the first version of the webpage, oneor more differences between the transcript of the recording of thevoiceover of the entirety of the displayed second version of the webpageand the textual representation of the voiceover of the first version ofthe webpage; determining a number of the one or more differences that donot satisfy the one or more accessibility rules; and indicating, basedon the determining the number of the one or more difference that do notsatisfy the one or more accessibility rules and via a displayed userinterface, a level of usability of the second version of the webpage bythe visually impaired individual.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein theone or more accessibility rules are issued by a legal authority.
 3. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the one or more accessibility rules areissued by an owner of a website that comprises the webpage.
 4. Themethod of claim 1, further comprising: comparing the number of the oneor more differences that do not satisfy the one or more accessibilityrules to a threshold; and based on a determination that the number ofthe one or more differences that do not satisfy the one or moreaccessibility rules exceeds the threshold, indicating, via the displayeduser interface, that the second version of the webpage is not compliantwith the one or more accessibility rules.
 5. The method of claim 4,further comprising indicating, via the displayed user interface,portions of the transcript of the recording of the voiceover of theentirety of the displayed second version of the webpage that are notcompliant with the one or more accessibility rules.
 6. The method ofclaim 1, further comprising: comparing the number of the one or moredifferences that do not satisfy the one or more accessibility rules to athreshold; and based on a determination that the number of the one ormore differences that do not satisfy the one or more accessibility rulesdoes not exceed the threshold, indicating, via the displayed userinterface, that the second version of the webpage is compliant with theone or more accessibility rules.
 7. The method of claim 1, whereinrecording the voiceover of the entirety of the displayed second versionof the webpage comprises generating audio data corresponding to eachdata input field within the second version of the webpage.
 8. The methodof claim 1, wherein recording the voiceover of the entirety of thedisplayed second version of the webpage comprises determining textualdata associated with each data input field within the displayed secondversion of the webpage.
 9. An apparatus comprising: one or moreprocessors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by theone or more processors, cause the apparatus to: modify a first versionof a webpage to create a second version of the webpage, wherein thefirst version of the webpage is compliant with one or more accessibilityrules that indicate a level of usability of the webpage by a visuallyimpaired individual; display the second version of the webpage; record avoiceover of an entirety of the displayed second version of the webpage;generate a transcript of the recording of the voiceover of the entiretyof the displayed second version of the webpage; compare the transcriptof the recording of the voiceover of the entirety of the displayedsecond version of the webpage to a textual representation of a voiceoverof the first version of the webpage; determine, based on the comparingthe transcript of the recording of the voiceover of the entirety of thedisplayed second version of the webpage to the textual representation ofthe voiceover of the first version of the webpage, one or moredifferences between the transcript of the recording of the voiceover ofthe entirety of the displayed second version of the webpage and thetextual representation of the voiceover of the first version of thewebpage; determine a number of the one or more differences that do notsatisfy the one or more accessibility rules; and indicate, based on thedetermining the number of the one or more difference that do not satisfythe one or more accessibility rules and via a displayed user interface,a level of usability of the second version of the webpage by thevisually impaired individual.
 10. The apparatus of claim 9, wherein theone or more accessibility rules are issued by a legal authority.
 11. Theapparatus of claim 9, wherein the one or more accessibility rules areissued by an owner of a website that comprises the webpage.
 12. Theapparatus of claim 9, the memory storing instructions that, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: comparethe number of the one or more differences that do not satisfy the one ormore accessibility rules to a threshold; and based on a determinationthat the number of the one or more differences that do not satisfy theone or more accessibility rules exceeds the threshold, indicate, via thedisplayed user interface, that the second version of the webpage is notcompliant with the one or more accessibility rules.
 13. The apparatus ofclaim 12, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the oneor more processors, cause the apparatus to indicate, via the displayeduser interface, portions of the transcript of the recording of thevoiceover of the entirety of the displayed second version of the webpagethat are not compliant with the one or more accessibility rules.
 14. Theapparatus of claim 9, the memory storing instructions that, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: comparethe number of the one or more differences that do not satisfy the one ormore accessibility rules to a threshold; and based on a determinationthat the number of the one or more differences that do not satisfy theone or more accessibility rules does not exceed the threshold, indicate,via the displayed user interface, that the second version of the webpageis compliant with the one or more accessibility rules.
 15. The apparatusof claim 9, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by theone or more processors, cause the apparatus to record the voiceover ofthe entirety of the displayed second version of the webpage bygenerating audio data corresponding to each data input field within thesecond version of the webpage.
 16. The apparatus of claim 9, the memorystoring instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors,cause the apparatus to record the voiceover of the entirety of thedisplayed second version of the webpage by determining textual dataassociated with each data input field within the displayed secondversion of the webpage.
 17. One or more non-transitory media storinginstructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause theone or more processors to perform steps comprising: modify a firstversion of a webpage to create a second version of the webpage, whereinthe first version of the webpage is compliant with one or moreaccessibility rules that indicate a level of usability of the webpage bya visually impaired individual; display the second version of thewebpage; record a voiceover of an entirety of the displayed secondversion of the webpage; generate a transcript of the recording of thevoiceover of the entirety of the displayed second version of thewebpage; compare the transcript of the recording of the voiceover of theentirety of the displayed second version of the webpage to a textualrepresentation of a voiceover of the first version of the webpage;determine, based on the comparing the transcript of the recording of thevoiceover of the entirety of the displayed second version of the webpageto the textual representation of the voiceover of the first version ofthe webpage, one or more differences between the transcript of therecording of the voiceover of the entirety of the displayed secondversion of the webpage and the textual representation of the voiceoverof the first version of the webpage; determine a number of the one ormore differences that do not satisfy the one or more accessibilityrules; and indicate, based on the determining the number of the one ormore difference that do not satisfy the one or more accessibility rulesand via a displayed user interface, a level of usability of the secondversion of the webpage by the visually impaired individual.
 18. The oneor more non-transitory media of claim 17, wherein the one or moreaccessibility rules are issued by a legal authority.
 19. The one or morenon-transitory media of claim 17, wherein the one or more accessibilityrules are issued by an owner of a website that comprises the webpage.20. The one or more non-transitory media of claim 17, wherein theinstructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the oneor more processors to indicate, via the displayed user interface,portions of the transcript of the recording of the voiceover of theentirety of the displayed second version of the webpage that are notcompliant with the one or more accessibility rules.